Sourcetree vs. Tower

I prefer to work visually and use the tool for merge and rebase operations. It helps when managing a large number of repos.

Incentivized

• Allows to manage GIT repositories in an intuitive and simple user interface
• Visually represents complicated workflows and branching
• Integrates with most well known GIT repository managing services

Incentivized

• Refreshing of the interface after a commit or merge
• All elements being consistent with the repo status
• Select all button on Trach status on different branches

Incentivized

We help new users onboard quickly and then use Sourcetree to handle their day-to-day SCM needs for managing CIs (Configuration Items). We can visually show management the branching and commit history to show the flow and pace of development.

Incentivized

I tried GitHub Desktop for a couple of days, but it is just not visual enough for me. It has no graph display for branches. Too much clicking is required to get info that the Sourcetree UI shows by default. Sourcetree gives you that "Big Picture" dashboard. GitHub Desktop seems unfinished to me due to its lack of this overview screen.

Incentivized

• In my experience, using Sourcetree actually slows down development if you're the average developer needing to do simple git actions. Getting set up is fast, but the learning curve to use the tool is just too steep if you're just looking to push, pull, commit, branch etc.
• Sourcetree is not implemented by default at our company, but is recommended as we primarily use Atlassian products. However the lack of integration with other Atlassian products means that this git GUI doesn't give any more or less ROI for your Atlassian ecosystem compared to another git GUI tool.
• For auditing and exploring history Sourcetree can be very helpful. Having all of this information in one place with a plethora of actions and tools at your disposal means you can audit repos much quicker than any other git GUI or online repo explorer.

Incentivized